SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Del) 967

S.N.DHINGRA
NEETA TREHAN – Appellant
Versus
GOPAL KRISHAN – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Navneet Goyal, Adv.
For the Respondent: V.P. Chaudhary Nitinjya Chaudhary and Sushma, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.

By present appeal, the appellants have assailed an order dated 23rd September, 1991 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal on two counts. The first that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal was not just and fair, it was inadequate and the other that the Tribunal wrongly held that the liability of the insurance company was limited only to pay a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- and balance was to be recovered from the owner of the vehicle.

2. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of deciding this appeal are that on 26th October, 1982, Sh. Yogesh Trehan (appellant No. 2 herein) and his father Sh. Yashpal Trehan were going on two wheeler scooter No. DLU-1675 being driven by Sh. Yogesh Trehan and they were hit by a truck bearing No. DHG-6383 with the result that father and son both fell from the scooter. While son who was driving the scooter fell on one side, the father fell on the other side and the father was run over by the truck. It was alleged that the truck was being driven rashly and negligently by its driver. His father died on the spot.

3.



































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top